unhistoric moves

[dansker]

hi
I thought this was suposed to be a historic game, but aparently when the allied AI is about to lose,
it will make some pretty unhistoric moves, like invading france in june 1943. so I lost the game because
they invaded a year too soon, thats stupid, they should have buildt in to the AI that it can not invade
france before june 1944

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: confident

hi
I thought this was suposed to be a historic game, but aparently when the allied AI is about to lose,
it will make some pretty unhistoric moves, like invading france in june 1943. so I lost the game because
they invaded a year too soon, thats stupid, they should have buildt in to the AI that it can not invade
france before june 1944

warspite1

But if you want a completely historical game guess what? It starts 1st September 1939 with the invasion of Poland and ends in May 1945 in the ruins of Berlin.

Of course everyone has their own threshold on what is acceptable in terms of historical/ahistorical but remember the US were pushing hard for a 1943 invasion for a long time. If the Germans haven't garrisoned the place and allowed the Allies to walk in why is that stupid?

[n0kn0k]

ORIGINAL: confident

hi
I thought this was suposed to be a historic game, but aparently when the allied AI is about to lose,
it will make some pretty unhistoric moves, like invading france in june 1943. so I lost the game because
they invaded a year too soon, thats stupid, they should have buildt in to the AI that it can not invade
france before june 1944

It's pretty easy to disable the non historical stuff in the scripts if you want. Most people would prefer an adaptive AI though. Otherwise you could just move all the German troops out of France into Russia. Knowing that the AI won't land till 1944. Hindsight is a very powerfull tool.

[dansker]

I just think it make the game pretty dificult if u have to defend all of france so soon.
I am pretty sure that the germans knew that the allied was not ready to invade france in 1943
is there any one in here who have won the game with the germans

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: confident

I just think it make the game pretty dificult if u have to defend all of france so soon.
I am pretty sure that the germans knew that the allied was not ready to invade france in 1943
is there any one in here who have won the game with the germans

warspite1

Just out of interest, if you think that it is stupid for the AI to play ahistorically (which is fine and up to you) do you play your side by the same rules - i.e. you invade France in May 1940? the Soviet Union in June 1941? Italy enters in June 1940? etc

As for the Germans knowing what the Allies would do, that is not correct. Look at the garrison wasted in Norway for example - and France in 1943 was not exactly empty.

[dansker]

hi warspite 1
yes I tried to du it historicly
I just think that the AI should have given the player more time to defeat russia

[dansker]

hi warspite1
I did garrison all habours in france with weapons opgrade 3 for all garrisons
still in 1 turn the allied landed 9 teams in 3 habours

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: confident

hi warspite 1
yes I tried to du it historicly
I just think that the AI should have given the player more time to defeat russia

warspite1

Fair enough - we each play our own way.

I suspect that, like with Matrix World In Flames and probably most strategic level games, if you want historical then this game may not be what you were looking for.

[AndyG1]

In response to the original post.....this isn't a serious question, right?

[xwormwood]

ORIGINAL: confident

hi
I thought this was suposed to be a historic game, but aparently when the allied AI is about to lose,
it will make some pretty unhistoric moves, like invading france in june 1943. so I lost the game because
they invaded a year too soon, thats stupid, they should have buildt in to the AI that it can not invade
france before june 1944

You are aware that the game is about free options, offering the ability to change history?

So if history gets changed by you, you feel comfortable, while when history gets changed by the artifical intelligence, you demand the historical timetable?

Don't get me wrong, I think you're a great guy, which just makes his first experiences with a strong AI. And there is of course the old dilemma (as described above): history versus what happens in your or my game.

So my guess is that you want a game against an AI which has no freedom to chose, you want a game against an opponent which has harder restrictions than yourself. I don't blame you for that, that is a perfectly good wish or idea. But that is not what Strategic Command will offer you. The game will offer you a challenge, based on the historical background of WW2. Think it through: if the AI is ready to do a D-Day in 1943, why should it wait till 1944? If the AI is able to research jet planes in 1944, why should it use them only in late 1945? If the AI is able to destroy one of your units, why should it wait until this very unit was destroyed historically?

I know that some gamers want an historical campaign, where there is no research or diplomacy, but automated tech advances and automated diplomacy. Maybe this will come as new campaign somewhere in the future. I guess such a game would be great fun to play, too.

So no hard feelings, ok?

Muster your man, start a new campaign, and show the AI what confident can do, when he puts his mind to it.
I'll meet you at your victory parade. Until than: happy gaming!


PS:

ORIGINAL: confident

is there any one in here who have won the game with the germans

Yes, there are even many (experienced) gamers which complain that it is too easy to win with the germans.
You'll get there, just keep up the same fire which you already showed when you decided to argue for your case in this forum. [:)]

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: confident

hi
I thought this was suposed to be a historic game, but aparently when the allied AI is about to lose,
it will make some pretty unhistoric moves, like invading france in june 1943. so I lost the game because
they invaded a year too soon, thats stupid, they should have buildt in to the AI that it can not invade
france before june 1944

You left it an opening, and it took it. That isn't "stupid".

[sPzAbt653]

I lost the game because they invaded a year too soon,

Me too [:@]

But the Germans did expect the Allies to land in France in 1943. They moved their best SS units to France in anticipation. And Eisenhower did plan to land in France in 1943, but the politics of the UK changed that to N. Africa followed by Sicily/Italy, which canceled France in 1943.

So in my game I too was shocked over being bowled over in France in 1943, but then I saw that the Allies had not gone into the Mediterranean at all. So I think fair is fair.

Now to be really fair, the Allies historically didn't have enough transport to land and support 9+ corps in 1943. But maybe the computer spent more Research on Logistics than the Allies did historically [;)]

[dansker]

hi xwormwood
are u torking about the old stg or the new one

I would like some tips on how to defeat russia,britten and usa almost at the same time
I most admit that I let the AI control italy that might have been a mistake as the italy AI
was almost useles

[dansker]

hi sPzAbt653
it wasent ewen 9 teams but 13 teams
have u tried the campagn again with the germans and won

[dave123]

although I disagree with the original post, in that I want an AI that is unpredictable and takes advantage of my mistakes; he points out a valid issue with the game.
There are just too many places for the allies to invade, and I think way too expensive for the axis to defend.

I have a post in another area of the forum about a game I'm playing as allies that details how I think the game is broken because of this.

My thread is called "fixes please" and is in the forum "the war room". I would welcome rebuttals.

I believe that the game will never be won by the axis (when multiplayer comes out) with roughly equal opponents using the current rules and map setup.

this screams for house rules - no invasions...